Tag: regulations

Dairy Defined: An Open Letter to FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Dear Dr. Hahn –

Sorry to bother you at such a busy time, but we need to talk. We’re guessing that 2020 wasn’t what you expected, dealing with COVID vaccines and a host of other pressing concerns. It’s been crazy for us too. But faith and friends can help you through, no matter how big or small the troubles may be. We hope you’ve felt supported through these challenging times.

We’ve noticed that recently, FDA has been getting more active on topics beyond COVID-19, in some cases even revisiting issues that have lain dormant from previous decades in the spirit of completing unfinished business. That made us think it was time to remind you about something you promised you’d deal with back in November, before everything turned upside down. At your FDA confirmation hearing, Senator Tammy Baldwin asked you whether and when FDA under your leadership would soon start enforcing labeling standards that reserve dairy terms for real dairy products, not the plant-based imposters that are posing an increasing problem for public health. You said you supported “clear, transparent, and understandable labeling for the American people” and that you would “very much” look into it.

How is that going? Any way we could help? We understand that FDA has kicked fake dairy deception down the road for decades, but the problem is only growing, public-health experts are growing concerned, and it isn’t a heavy lift for the FDA to do what’s not only true to its mission but also what’s legally required. In fact, we have provided an entire road map proposal that offers a clear guide to resolution – one that is well-grounded in First Amendment law, would ensure that consumers know what products are and aren’t nutritionally, and even could allow plant-based “milks” to continue dairy terms in some instances, with proper qualifiers that have long been established in FDA regulations to clearly distinguish them from dairy.

We had been very hopeful, based on your pledge, that this would be the year this problem could finally be solved. Since it’s late in 2020 – and who knows what the next few months might be like? — we thought we should check in.

We’re cheering for you to take action. FDA commissioner is never an easy job, and 2020’s been a challenge for the ages. But since fake milk has long been crucially important to dairy farmers – in places like Wisconsin, in Michigan, in Pennsylvania, in Minnesota, and all across the United States – we thought this might be a good time to remind you of this promise.

We’re happy to chat further because this simple matter can be resolved soon, to the benefit of everyone. Well, maybe not marketers of dishonest products, but they’ve had their day. Say hi to everyone at FDA for us, there’s never enough bandwidth on Zoom to talk to everyone we’d like to. Good luck with the rest of the year!

With Regards,

The National Milk Producers Federation

NMPF’s Detlefsen Discusses the Dietary Guidelines

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

Clay Detlefsen, NMPF’s senior vice president for regulatory affairs, discusses the science behind the Dietary Guidelines report released this week, as well as the report’s reaffirmation of dairy’s nutritional value. Detlefsen spoke on the “Adams on Agriculture” podcast.

 

 

Dairy Farmers Elated at Homeland Security’s Reaffirmation of Food and Agriculture as a Critical Industry

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

ARLINGTON, Va. – The National Milk Producers Federation, the largest organization of U.S. dairy farmers, applauded the Trump Administration’s explanation that the food and agriculture is a critical infrastructure industry in the wake of the coronavirus national emergency, a move that encourages state and local authorities to allow farms and the entire food-supply chain to continue operating as usual amid current and potential restrictions created to stem the spread of the virus.

“This declaration allows farmers to do what they do best – feed U.S. consumers – in a time of acute need and anxiety,” said Jim Mulhern, president and CEO of NMPF. “Agriculture is working around the clock to ensure timely delivery of safe, abundant food. That’s what farmers always do – but in a time of unprecedented public-health concern, a fully functioning food system is even more critical to national health and well-being.”

The administration’s designation of “essential critical infrastructure workforce” was announced today by the Department of Homeland Security.  NMPF has been deeply involved with the federal government in food supply-chain discussions throughout the coronavirus crisis: Its senior vice president of regulatory and environmental affairs, Clay Detlefsen, is the private-sector chair of the Food and Agricultural Sector Coordinating Council, an industry-government collaboration set up after the Sept. 2001 terror attacks to share information between government agencies and private businesses.

The Homeland Security declaration reflects how effectively industry is working with government and how much that relationship has progressed in this crisis, Detlefsen said. “We’re witnessing incredible collaboration among the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other government agencies and all sectors of the food industry. That’s been crucial to keeping supply chains running during these crucial days for public health and confidence.

“These key partnerships are firing on all cylinders,” Detlefsen said. “Agriculture’s appropriate designation as a critical industry should bring relief to farm families who want to help their country as well as to consumers who now know the world’s greatest agricultural producers can meet their needs unimpeded.”

Note: Listen to this podcast for more on Detlefsen’s role in the crisis and his thoughts on government response.

Working to Improve Dairy Labor, Inside and Outside Washington

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

As the voice of dairy farmers in Washington, the National Milk Producers Federation constantly works for policy solutions to help our members succeed. As an organization that advances the interests of dairy farmers and the cooperatives they own, we strive to help producers meet their evolving needs regardless of the prevailing policy environment in Washington. Our ongoing efforts to improve dairy’s labor situation are a clear example of both priorities at work.

Agricultural labor reform legislation is a top Washington priority for us in 2020. We’re doing all we can to advance the policy process even though it’s a contentious election year. We’re also building the new FARM Workforce Development program, which will give farmers tools to better manage their workforce needs in the here and now. One effort aims to create a reliable ag worker program that would alleviate labor shortages and allow for future growth; the other focuses on human resources and safety management to ensure the highest quality dairy workforce here and now. The dual approach embodies NMPF’s comprehensive, farmer-driven problem-solving.

About farm-labor legislation: We celebrated a win last December when the House of Representatives passed its first ag-labor bill since 1986. The initiative created a workable guest-worker program for year-round agricultural sectors, including dairy, and offered a vehicle that can be improved and reconciled with any bill on this topic the Senate passes this year. But of course, key to that strategy is actual Senate passage – and on that front we are working diligently to pave a way forward.

We’re anticipating a Senate bill will be introduced this spring containing changes to the H-2A visa program so it can work for dairy – and stabilization of our current workforce. Observers of behind-the-scenes negotiations expect that the Republican-led Senate will likely make improvements to H2A that build on the House’s initial effort. Indications are that USDA is working to keep ag labor reform on the agenda and that the White House has spoken with Republican senators on this topic, suggesting that a compromise is still possible.

Any Senate bill would likely need to be considered before Congress leaves for its summer recess to have a chance to be reconciled with the House legislation in time for final congressional approval this year. We’re making sure dairy’s voice is heard throughout the process – including by having a large group of our dairy advocates from across the country make Capitol Hill visits this month to talk with their Senators. Ag labor reform is crucial for future prosperity. This potential opportunity isn’t one we can afford to let pass by.

But working for improvements in Washington isn’t enough to help farmers navigating an increasingly complex labor market on their own farms every day. That’s where FARM Workforce Development (WFD) comes in. FARM is developing a guide to best practices that offers assistance, not requirements — designed to help farms improve their HR and safety management; identify which best practices will be most useful to implement on their farm; and track improvement over time.

The WFD program area as a whole is focused on farm-level best-practices. And by helping farmers better lead their workforces, it also provides important assurances to dairy customers, an increasingly important consideration in a consumer conscious age.

A WFD evaluation tool was tested in a pilot program involving 10 cooperatives and 28 dairies that provided feedback, ranging in size from 120 cows to 18,000. We also solicited public comments on the tool. Overall response to the tool was positive and constructive, and the tool itself will be discussed and presented for approval at National Milk’s Board meeting later this month. FARM Workforce Development may not generate the headlines of immigration legislation, but it is very important – because farmers won’t prosper tomorrow if they don’t thrive in the here and now.

That is, after all, what we are striving to do. There may be no more emotional or complex an issue in dairy today than labor markets. But that’s exactly why engagement is so crucial. Farmer concerns spur action – and progress – inside the Beltway and far beyond it. It’s all how we serve our members, and our commitment will not waver.

FDA Nomination Heads to Senate Floor With NMPF Hopeful for Progress on Fake Milk

Posted on by Alan Bjerga

ARLINGTON, Va. – The National Milk Producers Federation today expressed hope that the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee vote to send Dr. Stephen Hahn’s nomination to be commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to the full Senate for final confirmation represents another step toward greater transparency in the use of dairy terms in the marketplace.

“It is long past time for the FDA to begin enforcing its own standards, which make clear that dairy terms are reserved for real dairy products, not plant-based imitators that mislead shoppers by misrepresenting nutritionally inferior products,” said Jim Mulhern, president and CEO of NMPF. “We are hopeful that today’s vote to forward Dr. Hahn’s nomination to the full Senate is the beginning of the end of this long process, and we are eager to work with Dr. Hahn upon his confirmation to ensure that dairy product standards are enforced once and for all.”

Hahn voiced his support in his confirmation hearing last month for “clear, transparent, and understandable labeling for the American people” in an exchange with Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

The National Milk Producers Federation, which has been speaking out on plant-based imitators for four decades, has been encouraged by recent, long overdue FDA attention to the issue. For more background on NMPF’s position and statements of support from public-health organizations, click here.  NMPF also in February released a “road map,” found here, for how the agency can adapt existing standards to reflect the current marketplace and protect labeling integrity.

NMPF, Agriculture Groups Work to Keep Science in Scientific Standards

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The Codex international food standards are meant to protect human health and establish fair trade practices by developing cohesive food safety standards for food and agricultural products. However, the mandate to base Codex international food standards on scientific fact may be up for debate in July.

The European Union and other countries are seeking to water down Codex’s scientific mandate and instead direct that nonscientific factors, such as consumer preference issues, be considered as Codex develops standards. This would have significant negative repercussions for the American dairy industry and its ability to challenge unscientific barriers to trade.

The Codex Executive Committee and Commission will meet at the beginning of this month to consider revising its procedures in light of EU pressure. NMPF is working with the U.S. Dairy Export Council to lead the charge against these changes and ensure that existing science-based Codex rules are enforced and followed to preserve a level playing field for U.S. exports. The outreach on this issue harnesses a united U.S. food and agricultural effort on this issue, including driving support for U.S positions at the meetings.

NMPF has joined with other leading U.S. agriculture groups to develop materials outlining this threat to share with policymakers and international stakeholders. Together with several of those groups and USDEC, NMPF staff met last month with USDA Undersecretary of Trade Ted McKinney and USTR Chief Agriculture Negotiator Gregg Doud to make the case as to why preserving the scientific structure of Codex is critical.

Organic Trade Association Releases Questionable Study; NMPF Fights Back

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

NMPF fought back after the Organic Trade Association released a study done by Emory University on June 26 that supposedly found that 60 percent of 35 conventional milk samples that were tested had antibiotic residues – a study that came with head-scratching conclusions when compared to the wealth of research already available on the issue.

The antibiotics detected by the study, which was funded by The Organic Center, included sulfamethazine and sulfathiazole, which aren’t allowed for use in lactating dairy cattle. One sample also tested positive for amoxicillin levels higher than what is approved by the FDA. The conventional samples also tested positive for pesticides and growth hormones, while organic milk samples tested were found to have no pesticides, antibiotics or growth hormones.

Many questions were raised about the study immediately after its release, after lab experts began to analyze the methodology of the study including its size, the standards used for the testing, and the four-year lag period between sample collection and the published analysis. The research also conflicted with rich data found by the National Milk Drug Residue Monitoring Program conducted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). That report in 2018 found that out of the 60,000 milk samples tested for sulfonamide drugs, none of the samples tested positive. Over the past decade, sulfonamide antibiotics were present in only 99 samples of the 884,455 tested.

NMPF released a joint statement with the International Dairy Foods Association and the National Dairy Council restating the safety of milk and calling out the flaws in the study. The article, written for USA Today, was quickly amended to include a section on “reasons for skepticism” highlighting the potential flaws of this study. NMPF has requested a meeting with FDA to discuss next steps.

Dairy Response to Organic-Industry-Funded Emory University Milk Study

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

A statement from the National Dairy Council, the International Dairy Foods Association, and the National Milk Producers Federation related to a study published today in Public Health Nutrition journal:

“Milk is one of the safest foods you can buy. Regarding this new study, it is very important to note that information about the methodology used is so scant that serious flaws are likely to exist. Many of the key results raise red flags and leave more questions than answers, including a sample size that is not statistically valid, a four-year lag between data collection and published analysis, and results that are so far out of line with federal government data that they seem implausible. Given these facts, combined with the historical testing data using FDA-approved methodology that clearly demonstrates the occurrence of residues for several of the antibiotics in question is extremely rare, the data underlying this recent study must be considered highly questionable and not a true reflection of the U.S. milk supply.”

NMPF Cheers EPA Efforts to Exempt Manure Air Emission Reporting Under EPCRA

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

NMPF celebrated a successful milestone in a more than two-year effort on June 5, when the Environmental Protection Agency issued a final rule that codified its earlier interpretation that air emissions from manure are not reportable under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act.

The action successfully concludes a battle in which NMPF was involved at every step.

“We are pleased with the outcome of EPA’s painstaking efforts,” said Jim Mulhern, NMPF president and CEO. “This final rule codifies what’s been the right thing to do all along.”

The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986 was created to help communities plan for chemical emergencies and requires industry to report on the storage, use and release of hazardous substances to federal, state, and local governments. The extent to which agricultural operations needed to be included has been controversial, with the EPA moving toward fewer burdensome requirements for farmers.

NMPF had been engaged with the effort to codify the manure exemption since April 2017, filing comments as recently as last December supporting EPA’s efforts last fall to modify its regulations to eliminate the reporting of ammonia or hydrogen sulfide air emissions from manure.

EPA had concluded in Oct. 2017 that air emissions from manure did not need to be reported under EPCRA while signaling it would explain its thinking on the issue through rulemaking. EPA’s assessment largely was based on the conclusion that the air emissions were a result of “routine agricultural operations” exempt from EPCRA reporting.

EPA’s final actions with EPCRA is consistent with Congress’ recent action to exempt manure emissions reporting requirements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).  NMPF supported that approach and noted that EPCRA’s legislative history showed that Congress did not intend for continuous air emissions reports to be filed under EPCRA if they were not required under CERCLA.

NMPF has noted in its support for EPA that the emergency response community has said it doesn’t need these reports and that they impede their emergency response function.